Report 1738
Report #1738 Skillset: Healing Skill: Sacrifice Org: Glomdoring Status: Submitted Aug 2017 Problem: Sacrifice is a 2 power ability that cures a targets affliction and damage for the cost of two power and a large damage hit to the caster. Current self healing is so strong that I can sacrifice an ally then be back to near full health in seconds. The opportunity cost for sacrifice is too cheap for the strength of the heal. 6 R: 5 Solution #1: Add a six second stun to casting sacrifice. This stun combined with the damage hit will give an enemy team the chance to switch targets and punish a healer for casting. It'll give good counter play in saving an ally but risking yourself and make casting it more risky. 7 R: 1 Solution #2: Increase the cost for sacrifice to 7 power. Its akin to true healing an ally but not as good so should be cheaper.) 6 R: 2 Solution #3: Sacrifice instead of simply curing an all afflictions and damage will transfer all of these afflictions to the caster of the sacrifice. EG if a target is at 70% health and has stupidity if I cast sacrifice on them my health gets shifted to 70% health and I get stupidity. Player Comments: ---on 8/13 @ 12:33 sets as pending ---on 8/14 @ 21:24 writes: Agree with the problem statement. In my opinion, any solution must include an increased power cost for this ability, some cooldown on usage, or a persisting penalty (debuffs on the Healer?). Otherwise there is virtually no reason to do anything other than spam it. Sentiments around having groups dynamically change targets (i.e., solutions 1 and 3) are nice in theory but not a reality in Lusternia's pvp environment. Supporting Sol 2. ---on 8/15 @ 00:50 writes: As said above, rather see a cooldown and power increase than a stun or health shift. Solution 2 is ok but seven power without any lingering beneficial effect is a little much. 15s (maybe even 30s) cooldown/debuff and five power sounds more fair. ---on 8/17 @ 00:29 writes: I do not think I have seen this abused much in practice? I am not a huge fan of any of these solutions. Sol1 and Sol3 are brutal - Sol3 kills it as a cure to severe intoxication too, assuming that passes to the healer. Sol2 I think is still a bit much. 2 to 7 is a big jump. I'm with Crek here - 5 power and a 15s cooldown seems more in line (as the AB says, you are 'severely weakened' - not just hurt). Alternately, you could just scale up the cost-per-affliction to make it riskier. It is not clear to me how many afflictions were being used to establish the Problem Statement. I could support 2, but not the others. ---on 8/17 @ 16:03 writes: I personally prefer making sacrifice more dangerous to use than a straight power/cool down increase. Solution 2 with 7 power works fine for me though if people prefer it. It'll be strong for use with any option. ---on 8/18 @ 00:33 writes: I think adding more counterplay opportunity is the way we should go, which I think Solution 1 accomplishes. Alternate idea: if the Burnout report is approved, Sacrifice could force Burnout the Healer. Though that'd be a bigger nerf than what's currently proposed, even if it's thematic. ---on 8/21 @ 11:30 writes: I will say that a six second stun is way too brutal for something like this, that isn't even used that much. I agree with increase in power, but 7 power still feels a little much. ---on 8/27 @ 23:03 writes: The concept of some of the solutions is to make it a brutal and risky skill to use as its a cure all with little cost. 7 Power with no downside seems ok to me but if you want it to be cheap powerwise then it should have a bigger cost elsewhere as well. I like the stun option as it means if the enemy team switches to you you risk death if your allies don't salt or gust you out. A good team could still Sacrifice and then cover for their healer to keep everyone in the fight and it would require cordination on both teams to react to. I agree with Kaimanahi to some extent about the power cost of 7 being a good amount for a risk less sac if your not a fan of the counter play options. ---on 8/28 @ 01:22 writes: I think 6 seconds is too long for sol 1